Capital Punishment - Research Paper Example

Capital Punishment Task: Capital Punishment Execution has generated massive controversy since no individual should have the authority to terminate life. Activists have concluded that capital punishment has led to execution of numerous innocent people. Crime level increased in the 1980s and 1990s. This culminated in the repealing of this sentence in numerous states in America including New York. The previous elimination of this sentence was a key win for humanitarian activists. Therefore, serial killers would only face a lifetime sentence instead of execution. In New York, crime rose significantly over the period, which the execution sentence was suspended. This resulted in considerable calls to re-reinstate execution. Later, the punishment was repealed. Hence, the state commenced executing criminals (Kelly, 2009). Within a year of repeal of the act, there was a reduction in crime. This reveals that in some ways execution has deterred crime. However, the reduction in criminal activity might be attributable to other factors such as increase in patrols and surveillance. Most crimes that led to execution are murders. Therefore, it is crucial to comprehend how most murder occurs. Research shows that most murder occurs when the perpetrators are under the influence of substances e.g., alcohol, or they are emotionally unstable. Substance use reduces the ability of an individual to foresee the consequences of their actions. Similarly, emotional instability causes individuals not to foresee the consequences of their actions. Subsequently, they do not whatsoever consider that they would face execution owing to their offences. Presence of the punishment would hence, not influence the occurrence of such crime since the perpetrators think irrationally. It is not until after some time that the repercussion of the actions sinks in. Additionally, some individuals are psychopaths. These perpetrators are psychological unstable thus, they commit murder irrespective of the consequent punishment (Kelly, 2009). Execution of criminals entails terminating their lives. This is in itself a crime. For people that value life, this form of punishment is beyond their consideration. The query on the impact of execution of criminals on the transgression rate is tricky. The impact of execution is hard to assess since criminal activities depend on countless variables. Factors such as poverty, drug use and lawlessness trigger crime in the society. Therefore, reduction of drugs, improvement in living standards and enforcement of the regulations can result in considerable in decline in crime (Kelly, 2009). Decrease in crime will require a multidimensional strategy. Consequently, implementation of execution will have nominal implication on crime. The implementation of execution after its repeal has raised fear among criminals. However, this has not deterred crime. Implementation of execution is a reactive means of addressing crime. The government should seek proactive means of addressing crime. The government should address the reasons that trigger crime. Consequently, the movement can root out the vice in a comprehensive manner. Deterring crime will not only require punitive measures, but also measures that will address crime proactively. As much as execution would create fear among criminals, it is evident that its ability to deter criminal is minimal (Kelly, 2009). Many murders cases go unpunished owing to the failure in investigations and the intelligence. Therefore, the best means of addressing is not reactive measures but proactive measures. This is because many criminal incidences have minimal evidence to enable a conviction. This means the failures of the legal system results in countless incidences going unpunished. This is among the factors that have triggered the increases in crime. The possibility of evading prosecution based on poor investigation has contributed to the increase in crime. Therefore, the best means of addressing crime is an analysis of the root causes such as poverty, drugs and lawlessness. If the police cut-off drug trade in the nation, crime will diminish. Illegal substances have triggered crime as gangs defend their territories. Additionally, increase in patrols will acts as a deterrent to offenders. This will require the authorities to dispatch more officers on patrols. Although police authorities have no control on employment, it contributes significantly to crime rates (Kelly, 2009). Lenient sentences have a considerable impact on crime. However, when analyzing crime, it is vital to analyze the social set up. Crime is more prevalent in dilapidated regions. Additionally, if drug trade exist then the region is susceptible to crime. Consequently, crime will persist despite harsh sentences. Evidently, crime cannot be addressed form one dimension, which is harsh sentencing of convicted individuals such as execution. Fighting crime will require a multidimensional strategy. The strategy would require the public to liaison with the police. Crime occurs due to a combination of factors. Therefore, the means to address crime should be multidimensional. The government should embrace a proactive means that will suppress the factors that trigger crime such drugs, unemployment and poverty. Most criminals engage in crime owing to financial reason. However, a few individuals engage in it because of psychological reasons. Therefore, if the authorities address matters such as unemployment and the drug trade, then crime may be suppressed significantly. However, if the authorities seek to address crime by legislating harsher penalties then this vice will reduce marginally. Therefore, proactive means of addressing crime seem more effective relative to harsh penalties such as execution (Simon, 2007). Despite activists condemning execution, there is considerable support for this sentence in America. Americans are of the opinion that executing serial killers will deter such trends. Executions of such criminal elements limit the chances of such individuals being set free via parole. Freeing criminal elements based on rehabilitation has had mixed results. Some individuals freed for good conduct have reverted to the criminal activity that led to their prior incarceration (Simon, 2007). Nonetheless, other individuals have not rejoined crime once paroled. The government should carefully evaluate the individuals that are suitable for parole. The government should not parole individuals incarcerated owing to capital offences such individual have a tendency to revert to their prior trends. The prison should ensure that convicts do not commit any further crime. Addressing crime does not simply entail the police forces. Nonetheless, it also entails the prison department, which has the basic objective of rehabilitating convicts. Generally, harsher sentences will have minimal implications on the extents of crime (Simon, 2007). Analyses of statistics from states, which execute criminals, reveal no significant differences in murder prevalence. It is expected that states that execute convicts should have lower levels of transgressions. However, statistics reveal that such states have enacted execution owing to higher rates of brutal offences punishable by execution. Consequently, states that execute convicts have a higher occurrence of offences punishable via execution. Texas and Virginia have some of the highest execution levels nationally. However, crime has not subsided. Conversely, Maryland that neighbours Virginia has no execution statute, but criminal level is lower than that of the states that execute convicts. Statistics reveals negative correlation between execution and crime. Execution should be a deterrent to crime, but the research has proved otherwise since offences that are punishable via execution are much higher in Virginia than Maryland. It is apparent that the emphasis ought to be on other means of fighting crime rather than execution. Virginia has an elaborate means of combating crime (Tyree, ND). The state has an elaborate judiciary, which has guaranteed that convicts do not commit offences further. The judiciary, police and prison departments have a vital role in crime prevention. If any of these departments fails in their campaign against crime, then the level of transgressions against the law will rise irrespective of the severity of punishments. These departments can succeed by undertaking concerted efforts against crime. Fighting crime requires the police to arrest and investigate any suspect. The evidence emerging from the investigation will form the basis of the case. The judiciary should then expedite the case to ensure justice. If convicted, the defendant should serve the sentence in a correction facilitate. In the correction facility, the convict should commence a rehabilitation process. Evidently, no single department named above can suppress crime efficiently without the cooperation of the other. Therefore, the government should ensure that the above departments are functioning cohesively (Simon, 2007). In light of the above details, the severity of sentences such as execution will have no impact on crime if the judiciary, police and prison departments are not functioning cohesively. If the investigations are inadequate, then criminals will evade punishment despite the severe penalties legislated. Reduction of crime is dependent on other factors other than severe punishment like execution. The justice system has a vital role in deterring crime. If the justice department fails, criminals will evade punishment. Therefore, execution would be irrelevant in the fight against transgressions (Tyree, ND). Execution entails termination of the life of a convict. Many queries exist in relation to the utilization of this form of a sentence. The opponents argue that life is sacred. Hence, nobody should terminate it. Additionally, the opponents question the morality surrounding execution. The legality or constitutionality of this sentence is a hotly contested agenda. The proponents argue that the authorities should undertake all possible means to guard the lives of its citizenry. In relation to the existing data, it is evident that execution has not deterred crime. Therefore, proponents that argue that the severity of the sentence would culminate in reduction of transgressions against the laws are unjustified (Tyree, ND). References Kelly, J. (2009). The Death Penalty and the Effect of Homicide Rates in States. Retrieved on July 7, 2012 from http://voices.yahoo.com/the-death-penalty-effect-homicide-rates-4549911.html?cat=7  Simon, J. (2007). Governing Through Crime: How the War on Crime Transformed American Democracy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Tyree, B. (ND). Does the Death Penalty Deter Crime? Retrieved on July 7, 2012 from https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~vwang/ps374/Tyree.pdf Read More